psycaz, on 20 October 2011 - 01:19 PM, said:
When those that refer to themselves as security for the whole do something, that is reflective of the whole.
Want to say that it's not reflective of all the Occupy sites, fine. Want to say it's not reflective of that particular cities site, I'll disagree with that.
As pertains to the issue of that 'memo' and its approval...yes, that reflects upon that particular city.
I re-read the article in the OP and this did bother me--
The memo was approved by the security committee and put before the general assembly. No vote was taken, but Lewis said it was essentially approved for distribution when no objections were raised.
as to the bolded--just because no objections were made does not mean the General Assembly approved it. Usually when things are put to a vote then there is a period where people discuss and objections if any are made. No vote, no discussion because people likely thought they'd have time later or did not understand it/had not read it yet. (just guessing on that)
Not the way things are done in other cities that I know of.
Don't get me wrong....I do have an issue with rapes not being reported to the police and supposedly only handled by the Security Committee.
Not thrilled with the rest...the 'filth and violence'... being presented as if it were the whole story. That is not representative of the whole movement or the people involved, only some.
Edited by Tricia, 20 October 2011 - 03:46 PM.
In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. --Thich Nhat Hanh
You don't need to attend every argument you are invited to
Do not ask that your kids live up to your expectations. Let your kids be who they are, and your expectations will be in breathless pursuit.